MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294104554 · doi:10.1186/s12966-022-01345-6

Optimising a multi-strategy implementation intervention to improve the delivery of a school physical activity policy at scale: findings from a randomised noninferiority trial

2022· article· en· W4294104554 on OpenAlexaff
Cassandra Lane, Luke Wolfenden, Alix Hall, Rachel Sutherland, Patti‐Jean Naylor, Christopher Oldmeadow, Lucy Leigh, Adam Shoesmith, Adrian Bauman, Nicole McCarthy, Nicole Nathan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilHunter Medical Research InstituteHunter New England Local Health District
KeywordsBehavioural sciencesIntervention (counseling)Scale (ratio)Physical activityPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialClinical nutritionAlternative medicineMedicinePsychologyMedical educationApplied psychologyGerontologyNursingGeographyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To maximise their potential health benefits, school-based physical activity policies need to be implemented at scale. This paper describes the third in a sequence of trials that sought to optimise an effective strategy (PACE) to assist schools' implementation of a physical activity policy. Specifically, it aimed to determine the probability that a multi-strategy intervention adapted to reduce in-person contact (Adapted PACE) was "as good as" the original intervention (PACE) in increasing the weekly minutes of structured physical activity implemented by classroom teachers. METHODS: A noninferiority cluster randomised controlled trial was undertaken with 48 primary schools in New South Wales, Australia. Schools were randomised to receive PACE or a model with adaptations made to the delivery modes (Adapted PACE). Teachers' scheduled minutes of weekly physical activity was assessed at baseline (Oct 2018-Feb 2019) and 12-month follow-up (Oct-Dec 2019). The noninferiority margin was set at - 16.4 minutes based on previous data and decision panel consensus. A linear mixed model analysed within a Bayesian framework was used to explore noninferiority between the two PACE models. A cost minimisation analysis was conducted from the health service provider perspective, using the Australian dollar (AUD). RESULTS: The posterior estimate for the between group difference at follow-up was - 2.3 minutes (95% credible interval = - 18.02, 14.45 minutes). There was an estimated 96% probability of Adapted PACE being considered noninferior (only 4% of the posterior samples crossed the noninferiority margin of - 16.4 minutes). That is, the minutes of physical activity implemented by teachers at Adapted PACE schools was not meaningfully less than the minutes of physical activity implemented by teachers at PACE schools. The mean total cost was AUD$25,375 (95% uncertainty interval = $21,499, $29,106) for PACE and AUD$16,421 (95% uncertainty interval = $13,974, $19,656) for Adapted PACE; an estimated reduction of AUD$373 (95% uncertainty interval = $173, $560) per school. CONCLUSIONS: It is highly probable that Adapted PACE is noninferior to the original model. It is a cost-efficient alternative also likely to be a more suitable approach to supporting large scale implementation of school physical activity policies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001229167).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical ActivitySame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207